The D.C. Court of Appeals sided with Georgetown University in a Dec. 4 ruling that invalidates several conditions of the university’s 10-year plan, including Georgetown’s enrollment cap.

The court ruled that the Board of Zoning Adjustment lacked “substantial evidence” when it rejected a proposed increase in enrollment of 389 students, from the current enrollment cap of 5,267 to 6,016 during the 2001 campus plan negotiations.

The court also sided with the university in stating that the BZA’s attempts to regulate unruly conduct by off-campus students, despite being a “reasonable and permissible goal,” exceeded the BZA’s “proper concerns and expertise.”

“Such micromanagement of the university’s disciplinary code and other educational activities by an agency whose sole expertise is in zoning is, in our view, inappropriate and unreasonable, especially when it can lead to such draconian sanctions,” the court’s opinion read.

But the court admonished the university for initially proposing to increase the enrollment cap by 389 and then later arguing that the board had no authority to restrict enrollment.

“Courts do not look with favor upon abrupt reversals of direction by litigants as they move from one court . to the next. In general, parties may not assert one theory at trial and another on appeal,” the opinion read.

Still, university officials hailed the court’s decision.

“We are certainly pleased with the ruling,” Julie Green Bataille, assistant vice president for communications, said. “The ruling seriously and thoughtfully addresses a number of the issues raised.”

The court’s decision did not set any new conditions, but instead remanded the decision back to the zoning board, which will now reexamine the enrollment cap and guidelines for curtailing rowdy off-campus students by using the court’s ruling as a framework to establish new conditions.

Barbara Zartman, the chair of the Citizens Association of Georgetown’s zoning committee, one of two community organizations that defended the conditions established in the campus plan, said that an enrollment cap remained necessary for any university situated in a residential neighborhood.

“A numerical cap seems essential to regulate the university, so it is stunning now to find that such a decision was made,” she said.

Zartman said that the court had “affirmed the appropriateness of a cap,” and the court decision clarifies what the zoning board can and cannot do in establishing new conditions.

Bataille said the university looks forward to working the board and residents to clarify these concerns.

The university cannot continue with campus construction if it is found in violation of the 10-year campus plan.

Separately, the D.C. Zoning Commission halted its enforcement of the enrollment cap last November after agreeing to reassess the cap.